The President of The United States of America: Leader of the Free World, But Apparently Not Of His Own Damn Country. S-M-H!

Remember when Republicans said President Obama was a socialist and was trying to make America a socialist nation? It is not true, and basic civics can prove it. There is a clear difference in ideology. But I am seeing great ignorance, knowledgable people leaving truth just to get their way or preference, and knowledgable that manipulate using the force of the first two. We are in a bad place.

All who are sincere and desire truth; hear and understand. 

America, whom we love and hold dear, is neither a pure democracy and definately not a socialist nation. We are a Republic that elects its representatives democratically or by popular vote; person by person or in the case of the presidency, state by state through the electoral college.

There is a social component, however, through the democratic process of electing representatives and is also inferred by the simple phrase "We the People". Also, the constitution speaks of a "General Welfare".

I say all these things to say the word "mandate" being thrown around by elected representatives from all sides; Republican, Democratic, Independant, and other may sound good and tickles the ears of some, but is ridiculous, laughable, and not wholly American. It is partial truth, which is sometimes worse than a whole lie, and is purposely being thrown around with bad intent by some officials. 

A Republic takes in account the voice of the people by way of voting, but we America is NOT mandate driven exclusively.

Every representative, regardless of office, are to do what is right and best for whom they represent, balanced by what is right for the whole, AND MUST be according to the law and principles of the land and the present circumstances, all while seeing down the road. Each representative is privied to information John and Jane Doe doesn't have access to. So it could never be wisest to follow the crowd, though good leadership asks and seeks out the opinions of all. 

All in government ought to do their best to keep and pay vows they made to get elected, but not if those vows are not expedient or feesible. And truthfully, if they purposely promise things they know should not be delivered they have already showed reason for disqualification; ignorance, a lack of integrity, or both.If sincere, but can not deliver, then they are to explain to their constituents the reasoning behind the action or lack of action.  This is how a properly functioning Republic works. If it were true that each elected official were to only move according to a "mandate", then their would be no need on any level to have any executive branch.  That would be socialism of which America is not.

All elected officials have a responsibility, but not a mandate, to their constituents. All elected officials are also governed by the laws of the land and bound. What happens when the responsibility conflicts with the law? Something has to give and we depend on whom we voted for to make right determinations; say no to the people or amend the law. Either way, the decision must be in agreement with the spirit and founding concepts of America, and not by preference or mandate. It is here where the unelected, but no less valuable in the axis of power, the Judicial Branch can take center stage.

Let me go further as to why I speak of the Supreme Court. They may be needed more than ever before if the other branches do not see the light and continue to leave the rest of America dangling and at their mercy. Mercy of which seems to be almost on "e" in Washington at this point.

I'm a big kid at heart, but still more mature than most in government now. Let me insert a game we all know and many adults still use: Rock Paper Scissors.

In Rock Paper Scissors; rock beats scissor, scissor beats paper, and paper beats rock.

All things being fair, if there are opposing ideals or contrary ways to move forward that are all Constitutional and legal; Executive beats Legaslative. The balance of powers of which our government was not made so that the Legislative Branch at any whim of displeasure can take control.  That's called a coupe. What has happened?  Just because the Executives idea is contrary to personal preference or even principle, it is not right to keep an endless political campaign going. Pouting like babies and holding the citizens hostage. When it is a matter of justice, I'm with you. But that has not been the case.

Balance of power exists to prevent dictatorship as in the president commits acts or tries to make laws unconstitutional. This differs from stopping the executive because you just don't like him or her or disagree.

If one votes for a Presidential candidate and also votes for one campaigning for a Senator because of certain views, and the Senatorial candidate wins but the Presidential candidate loses to his opponent which has opposing views, which view or views should the voter expect to be established? The answer is the views of the elected President, not because of "mandate", but because this is what the President stood for and the people voted for him wanting to follow that path. It is the elected Senators job to present and influence, but not subvert the lawful political views of the elected President.

In this, I just came up with the title of this piece:
The President of The United States of America: Leader of the Free World, But Not Of His Own Damn Country. S-M-H!

Ridiculous. We look ridiculous to the whole world! What happened to that shining city on a hill; a beacon of light and hope.

#THINK!

I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America. And to the REPUBLIC for which it stands.
One Nation. Under God. Indivisible. With Liberty and Justice for all.

God bless this Republic: America.

-Yulanda K.

Published with Blogger-droid v2.0.9